Ah my good friend GratefulFan; I wondered when you would arrive.
The problem with all of your hypothetical situations and arguments are - they can only be resolved with a hypothetical solution. As these imaginary situations depend upon theoretical answers - neither the question, argument or solution hold any validity; and in sum are a waste of time and do not deserve the time devoted to such frivolous pursuits.
Now before you go off and re-write
"Twelve Angry Men"; lets deal in some absolutes:
Mr Fuller runs a YouTube channel of
his own free will and choice. What
he decides to distribute, broadcast, disseminate, publish or circulate there from - is again of
his own free will and choice.
On that channel he distributes both material which can be bought from both the internet and most good record stores, along with material unpublished elsewhere.
Whether Mr. Fuller has received these tracks from me, you, Greg Brooks, or even Roger Taylor himself - signed in Roger's own blood - in triplicate - and with his blessing - is (as you know) an academic red herring.
It is still illegal for him to do so (upload and broadcast that is), and as such, sooner or later will face the wrath of the RIAA. (And that is just the American arm of copyright law).
Please read the following story (I hope you are reading this too David): "Woman to Pay RIAA $220,000 For 24 Downloaded Songs"
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/119550-Woman-to-Pay-RIAA-220-000-For-24-Downloaded-Songs Let me rephrase that - a fine of almost one-quarter of one million US dollars for
downloading!
It therefore begs the question what would the
uploading of a whole station of YouTube tracks be worth?
This thread is not about me; or other die hard collectors.
This thread is not about whether Mr. Fuller ripped off the Fanthology or not, or whether his material was accrued elsewhere; again all academic and semantics. There are a thousand and one (perhaps two) sleight of hand ways to change and misdirect this thread but let's stick to the ONE key point here.
This thread is about owning the LEGAL rights to freely distribute material that belongs to others - and to do so otherwise my dear (un)grateful fan is
ILLEGAL and indefensable. End of argument, full stop.
Now then; does the RIAA know about Mr. Fuller and his activities;
Yes - indeed they do! Well they sure do now - and they are indeed gunning after him.
(Perhaps not a good choice of wording in the wake of the recent US NRA controversies - but you get the point).
(Oh I am not that mean; I did not report him); but David has received dozens of complaints regarding his "Copyright of David Fuller" stunt - which in turn has drawn even more attention to the RIAA of his illegal activities.
(The sqeakiest trolley demands the most attention and all that).
The next steps are out of my hands, your hands, Roger Taylor's hands, Queen's hands, Queenzone hands, and all squarely return to the feet (I love mixed metaphors) of David Fuller himself.
Now why not put that obviously great but bored mind of yours into his legal defence team.
From where I am sitting - he is in desperate need of one.
And he has no one to blame but his own stupidity, greed, and lust for attention.
That is the "real" story: The remainder is just out of context framework.